linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.1 000/155] 5.1.10-stable review

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 14 Jun 2019 07:50:40 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Jiunn Chang <c0d1n61at3@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux@...ck-us.net, shuah@...nel.org,
        patches@...nelci.org, ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.1 000/155] 5.1.10-stable review

On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 03:08:49PM -0500, Jiunn Chang wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:31:52AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.1.10 release.
> > There are 155 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> > to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> > let me know.
> > 
> > Responses should be made by Sat 15 Jun 2019 07:54:40 AM UTC.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > 
> > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
> > 	https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v5.x/stable-review/patch-5.1.10-rc1.gz
> > or in the git tree and branch at:
> > 	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.1.y
> > and the diffstat can be found below.
> > 
> > thanks,
> > 
> > greg k-h
> > 
> > -------------
> Compiled and booted.  No regressions on x86_64.
> 
> This is for 5.1.10-rc2 from git --no-pager log --oneline -1.

What do you mean by 'git --no-pager log --oneline -1' ?

thanks for testing,

greg k-h